Horace Campbell is Professor of African American Studies and Political Science at Syracuse University. His recent book is Global NATO and the Catastrophic Failure in Libya. He is author of: Rasta and Resistance From Marcus Garvey to Walter Rodney; Reclaiming Zimbabwe: The Exhaustion of the Patriarchal Model of Liberation; Pan Africanism, Pan Africanists and African Liberation in the 21st Century; and Barack Obama and 21st Century Politics. Follow on Twitter @Horace_Campbell.

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Beyond the fanning of US militarism in Africa: A response to Nick Turse’s “terror diaspora” (part 2)

AFRICANS ARE NOT PASSIVE TO THREATS
Characteristic
of many Western commentators on African issues, the narrative by Turse is cast
as though Africans were passive to or incapable of tackling security issues.
This narrative is well fitted for the justification of U.S. military expansion
in Africa. Since the emergence of China, Brazil, Venezuela and other economic
partners in Africa, the plan of US militarists has been the expansion of its
militarism there. But they overplayed their hands through the Libyan
intervention. Africans reacted by removing Jean Ping as the head of the African
Union.

Africans are planning to reverse the carnage in North Africa. In this
instance, they have allies. The African Union has advanced it planning for the
establishment of the African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crises. In Mali
the AU has worked closely with the Security Council for the establishment of
the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA). Very few in the West have noticed that China
has announced that it will be sending 600 peace keepers to Mali under MINUSMA.
Tanzania and South Africa are intervening in Eastern Congo to curb the
EU/Rwanda plans for the dismemberment of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
At the summit of the African Union, the President of Brazil condemned France
and European neo-colonialism in Africa. Brazil is working closely with Africa
to counter the stranglehold of the EU.In
recent books by myself (Global Nato and the Catastrophic Failure in
Libya), Vijay Prashad (Arab Spring: Libyan Winter), and
Maximiliam Forte (Slouching towards Sirte: NATO's
War on Libya and Africa), readers would discern that the calculation was
for Libya to be a base for the projected military engagement in North Africa,
when the revolution matures. Libya was also one component of the alliance
between France and the Crusaders. If Nick Turse had followed the friendship
between the French General Marcel Bigeard and David Petraeus, he would have
understood the deep rooted racism of Bigeard. Bigeard was a semi fascist who
carried out crimes in Algeria. This was the military model for General
David Petraeus. We have to thank Paula Broadwell for exposing how much
Petraeus admired the butcher of the people of Algeria.

The
aggressiveness and resilience of Africans on matters relating to security
challenges should never be disregarded. There has been much ink flowing about a
“New Scramble for Africa.” Such arguments do not grasp the full dimensions of
the militarism and destruction that accompanied the European scramble for
Africa 1880-1920. Africans opposed that period of militarism and the
independence struggles reversed the overt western military domination of
Africa.

Modern
Africa has hardly ever witnessed any security challenge greater than apartheid.
But at that epoch in history when the U.S. and Western powers threw their
military might behind apartheid, Africans united and aggressively defeated,
both morally and physically, the seemingly gargantuan apartheid system. Though
hardly acknowledged by western analysts, Africa is still up to the task. The figures of the U.S. military expenditure in Africa today
cannot compare with the monies that had been spent during the period of U.S.
military support for apartheid. In those days, the U.S. military, through the
International Military Education and Training (IMET), spent large amounts of
money from apartheid South Africa, Zaire, Angola (on Jonas Savimbi), to
Morocco, Egypt and Somalia under President Siad Barre. Mobutu in Zaire was the link
for these military expenditures. Yet, Africans defeated the apartheid/Savimbi
alliance.

AFRICAN MILITARIES AND U.S. MILITARISM
There
are 54 countries in Africa. What some in the west may not understand in the
historic relationship between U.S. military and the top military brass in
Africa and the planning of AFRICOM is that there are a number of strong
military establishments in Africa: South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, Tanzania,
Angola, Ethiopia and Algeria. All of these military formations have links
with the U.S. military but the planning of these governments diverges from the
planning of AFRICOM. Take Algeria for example. This is one state that is
manipulating the U.S. military for its own interest. The regime is in a
delicate situation and what progressive peace activists should do is to
expose how the U.S. conservatives and elements in the Algerian military and
intelligence services fabricated terrorism in the Sahel to justify the
expenditures of the Trans Sahara counter terrorism Initiative. This fabrication
of terrorism has been exposed in the book The Dying Sahara by
Jeremy Keenan.
The
same goes for a country such as Ethiopia. These countries such as Ethiopia and
Algeria align with the U.S. military in order to stem the time of popular
democratic change in their societies. Yet, as we saw in Egypt when the people
move, nothing will be able to stop them. The U.S. and their allies in the
Egyptian military may collude to undermine the Egyptian revolution but as
Victor Hugo stated clearly, “No army can stop an idea whose time has come.” The
idea of popular revolution and African independence has arrived. Revolution is
not an event. It is a process that may involve twists and turns, zigs and zags,
but cannot be stopped.
The
case of Kenya provides a clear example of the contradictions between the
imperial planners of Africom and the Kenyan bourgeoisie. For a long time, Kenya
had been a base for U.S. counter terrorism in Eastern Africa, but the Kenyan ruling
class has outgrown the dictates of the U.S. and now has robust relations with
the Chinese. They are building a major port at Lamu and plan a road/pipeline to
Juba, with a brand new town at Isiolo to have another road to Addis Ababa. The
U.S. security establishment is opposing this infrastructure development because
the Chinese are involved. The contradictions between Kenya and the USA in this
regard are coming to a head.
Kenya
is growing very fast and the U.S. counter terror effort contradicts their plans
for economic expansion. Kenyan capitalists want to fly in the region and expand
commercial air flights to Somalia but the U.S. drone program out of Djibouti and
Ethiopia seeks to discourage these expansions of commercial air travel.
Instead, the Tanzanians are expanding cheap air travel.
In
opposition to Africa's economic reconstruction the conservatives in the
system are doubling down on the CIA fronts and their alliance with Saudi Arabia
and Qatar to covertly keep some societies unstable. The Qataris are active in
Somalia. But President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda will not go along with this
planning. Museveni is fighting for his political life and he has lost hundreds
of soldiers in Somalia. Hence, Kenya and Uganda want to bring Somalia under the
East African Community. In order to keep Somalia unstable, the British has now
deployed its person Nicholas Kay to be the UN Special Representative to Somalia, basically the
UN “governor.” Kenya and
Uganda have other plans. International oil firms also want to see changes in
Somalia. Recently the business papers reported that “Somalia Could Become
World's 7th Largest Oil producer.”[1] One major contribution that can be made by
the peace and justice forces is for the U.S. government to expose the insurance
companies and lawyers who have been complicit in the piracy in the Indian
Ocean. Nick Turse mentions the same growth of piracy in the Gulf of Guinea.
These so called pirates are small cogs in a big wheel of international
insurance and private military contractors.THERE ARE SEISMIC CHANGES GOING ON IN AFRICA
This
is a long response, but I wanted to alert readers to the fact that many in the
media in the U.S. would want to have a monopoly on the discussion on
Africa but they are so out of date. Hence, they uncritically reproduce the
press releases from the information centers that fit into the propaganda war
against Africans by Africom. Africa is past the stage of failed states. Wall
Street is looking at the mega deals between Brazil, China and Africa and wants
to find a way in. The military intervention in Libya was a turning point.
Africans have compared this intervention to the Italian invasion of Abyssinia
in 1935. Then George Padmore, C.L.R James and Paul Robeson warned the West
about the fact that the intervention was the precursor to war. After the Italian
invasion of Abyssinia there was the Spanish Civil war, the maturation of
fascism in Germany precipitating a global war with the genocide and the
Hiroshima experiences topping the icing on to the Italian invasion. Africans
are warning the world of the impending results of the silence of the peace
movement about the results of the intervention in Libya and the planned war
against Iran (via Syria).
There
might be pockets of instability in places such as Nigeria, Sudan, DRC, Somalia
and Mali, but these five places cannot be the entire story of Africa. There are
49 other countries in Africa and the Africans have a clear plan. These plans
are being spelt out by the progressive platforms.
African
diplomats are working to isolate the Saudi Arabia and Qatar elements of
destabilization who are allied with a section of U.S. militarists. It is not by
accident that the former CEO of Blackwater (Eric Prince) has taken refuge in
the Gulf. It is in Nigeria where elements from Qatar and Saudi Arabia fund
destabilization through Islamic fundamentalists whose activities are
threatening to hold Africa back. However, the Nigerians made a pledge that
their country will never be broken again.
Patriotic
and Pan African diplomats want to work with the United Nations to end the work
of the Private Military Contractors. They have been working very hard along
with Brazil and Russia to ensure that the U.S. Security Council does not rubber
stamp U.S. military adventures in Africa.
I
would like to alert Turse that there are folks within the Obama administration
who want to distance themselves from AFRICOM. When John Kerry attended the
meeting of the African Union in Addis Ababa in May he did not mention Africom.
Instead, he mentioned the fact that his wife was part of the anti-apartheid
struggle in South Africa. During his visit to Africa, the President never
mentioned AFRICOM. The president mentioned trade and investment and announced a
major initiative called Power Africa. Progressives have already seen the
connections between Obama and corporations such as GE.[2]
Instead
of reproducing the view that Africa is a hotbed of terrorism in a bid to shore
up support for AFRICOM and militarism, there is need to do thorough research on
Africa, beyond the talking points of U.S. military and intelligence apparatus,
and independent of the of the old worn out narratives about Africa. Western
analysts who oppose militarism elsewhere must do same with regards to Africa.
We must eschew the arrogance of narratives that tend to portray Africans as being
passive about their own challenges. The forces in Africa that defeated
apartheid are still alive.